Quote:
Originally Posted by InfiniteNow
The only difference is that Pickens wants to put us onto another gas related fuel, which itself will run out and continue environmental impact. He agrees that solar and wind are hugely important, but simply delays their full implementation by arguing natural gas.
|
You make it sound like you didn't even watch Picken's plan. Pickens doesn't advocate putting us on another gas, only using gas that we're already using for electricity as an interim fuel for transportation. Gore's plan doesn't even address transportation energy at all. Pickens also isn't advocating any delay. They already have one community on wind power and construction on another wind farm is under way. Pickens is advocating replacement of electricity generation in under 10 years time with wind plus a 38% reduction in foreign oil consumption for transportation by switching some of it to natural gas.
Pickens is attacking the problem on two fronts and Gore is only proposing an attack on one. Further, Pickens is already in action doing something by actively investing and building wind farms. He has construction under way. How many megawatts is Gore currently producing and what projects is he breaking ground on?
Without the required battery technology that is currently an obstacle to enabling electricity as an option for transportation energy what else would you propose for transportation energy? In the short term it looks like we are stuck with internal combustion as the major player in transportation. Should we switch what we can to a cleaner fuel in the interim or just keep using what we're using now?
----------------
Clay
Editor and Forum Administrator
stego anyone?
Add yourself to
Hypography's Frappr.
"There are only 10 kinds of people in the world --
.....Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
"Draw no conclusions before their time."
